Towards a multi‐criteria approach for priority setting: an application to Ghana

Baltussen, Rob; Stolk, Elly; Chisholm, Dan; Aikins, Moses

doi:10.1002/hec.1092

Cited by 132 publications

(124 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

115

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…resource allocation and priority-setting choices) involving other people in society (e.g. Roberts et al, 1999;Farrar et al, 2000;Ratcliffe, 2000;Bryan et al, 2002;Schwappach, 2003;Gyrd-Hansen, 2004;Schwappach and Strasmann, 2006;Baltussen et al, 2006). These 'social' DCE studies have been reviewed elsewhere (Green, 2007); see a summary of the characteristics of these studies in Appendix A.…”

Section: Using Dces To Explore Social Valuesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Across the 11 social context DCEs identified in the review by Green (2007), there are a range of study objectives explored, and a broad range of attributes and methods employed. In 4 of the 11 studies the context was one involving general priority-setting criteria, for policy-level considerations (Schwappach, 2003;Schwappach and Strasmann, 2006;Baltussen et al, 2006;Tappenden et al, 2007), as in the study presented in this paper. All four of these studies used self-complete methods, in selected or convenience samples.…”

Section: Using Dces To Explore Social Valuesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The UK studies were methodological in nature, investigating the assumptions underlying the maximisation of quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and comprised a small pilot study (n 5 91) and a large random sample of the general population (n 5 909). Two studies have considered cost-effectiveness (Baltussen et al, 2006;Tappenden et al, 2007), with both of these studies using a self-complete format in samples of health policy makers with some familiarity with the use of cost-effectiveness analysis.…”

Section: Using Dces To Explore Social Valuesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Exploring the social value of health‐care interventions: a stated preference discrete choice experiment

2008

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SUMMARYMuch of the literature on distributive preferences covers specific considerations in isolation, and recent reviews have suggested that research is required to inform on the relative importance of various key considerations. Responding to this research recommendation, we explore the distributive preferences of the general public using a set of generic social value judgments. We report on a discrete choice experiment (DCE) survey, using face-to-face interviews, in a sample of the general population (n 5 259). The context for the survey was resource allocation decisions in the UK National Health Service, using the process of health technology appraisal as an example. The attributes used covered health improvement, value for money, severity of health, and availability of other treatments, and it is the first such survey to use cost-effectiveness in scenarios described to the general public. Results support the feasibility and acceptability of the DCE approach for the elicitation of public preferences. Choice data are used to consider the relative importance of changes across attribute levels, and to model utility scores and relative probabilities for the full set of combinations of attributes and levels in the experimental design used (n 5 64). Results allow the relative social value of health technology scenarios to be explored. Findings add to a sparse literature on 'social' preferences, and show that DCE data can be used to consider the strength of preference over alternative scenarios in a prioritysetting context.

show abstract

Section: Using Dces To Explore Social Valuesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Using Dces To Explore Social Valuesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Using Dces To Explore Social Valuesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Exploring the social value of health‐care interventions: a stated preference discrete choice experiment

2008

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Such multi-criteria priority setting is usually undertaken in a strictly qualitative way, for example, with reference to a series of second-stage criteria such as strength of evidence, equity, feasibility and acceptability 46 . Recent work has sought to develop more quantitative methods that introduce these other goals explicitly into the cost-effectiveness calculus 47,48 , but it is too early to assess the extent to which it usefully guides the policy-making process. Whichever approach is adopted, the conclusion to be drawn is that there is a clear need to go beyond cost-effectiveness considerations only, and that the way to most appropriately accomplish this is by carefully considering the priority to be accorded to interventions from a number of locally determined perspectives (in isolation and then in conjunction with each other).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Economic evaluation in health: saving money or improving care?

Chisholm

Evans

2007

Journal of Medical Economics

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SummaryEconomic evaluation, most commonly in the form of cost-effectiveness analysis, has now become an established tool of overall health fi nancing policy. However, health policy makers choose to use or ignore the accumulated body of economic evidence for a variety of reasons. This policy review takes a step back and looks objectively at the appropriate role and use of cost-effectiveness analysis within the broader context of health system fi nancing, and also discusses a series of technical limitations (and potential solutions) that impact on the generation of a genuinely comparable economic evidence base in health at the population level. While the explicit purpose of economic evaluation is to address the health fi nancing objective of effi ciency, the authors conclude that its application can be usefully extended to other health system goals, including fi nancial protection (specifi cation of core public healthcare packages for universal insurance) and equity in fi nancing (assessment of intervention costs and effects by stakeholder or socioeconomic group). In order to contribute to these broader objectives, a sectoral or population-based approach to cost-effectiveness analysis is needed.

show abstract

“…In their approach, policy makers are presented with pairs of multiattributed healthcare interventions and attribute weights are derived by …tting a logistic regression model. Case studies of this approach in Ghana and Nepal are presented in [131][132] [133].…”

Section: Commissioning Health Servicesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis

Greco¹,

Ehrgott²,

Figueira³

2016

International Series in Operations Research &Amp; Management Science

536

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Multicriteria Portfolio Analysis spans several methods which typically employ build on MCDA to guide the selection of a subset (i.e., portfolio) of available objects, with the aim of maximising the performance of the resulting portfolio with regard to multiple criteria, subject to the requirement that the selected portfolio does not consume of resources consumed by the portfolio does not exceed the availability of resources and, moreover, satis…es other relevant constraints as well. In this chapter, we present a formal model of this selection problem and describe how this model can present both challenges (e.g. portfolio value may, due to the interactions of elements, depend on project-level decisions in complex and non-additive ways) and opportunities (e.g. triage rules can be used to focus elicitation on projects which are critical) for value assessment. We also survey the application of Portfolio Decision Analysis in several domains, such as allocation of R&D expenditure, military procurement, prioritisation of healthcare projects, and environment and energy planning, and conclude by outlining possible future research directions.

show abstract

Towards a multi‐criteria approach for priority setting: an application to Ghana

Abstract: This explorative study has introduced a multi-criteria approach to priority setting. It has shown the feasibility of accounting for efficiency, equity and other societal concerns in prioritization decisions, and its potentially large impact on priority setting.

Cited by 132 publications

References 12 publications

Exploring the social value of health‐care interventions: a stated preference discrete choice experiment

Exploring the social value of health‐care interventions: a stated preference discrete choice experiment

Economic evaluation in health: saving money or improving care?

Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About